Pages

Tuesday, October 7, 2014

Revolutionary Republicans and the Ten Commandments

Every now and then, I still come across professed devout Christians who are republicans (shocking, I know). Some, contradictorily, even state that monarchy could be a better vehicle for godly government but that being a Christian contradicts being a monarchist. Which is absurd and obviously makes no sense. I will not repeat the very, very long list of Biblical passages explicitly commanding Christians to be monarchists, long-time readers have seen them and they are in the archives for newcomers to look up if they so wish. Rather, I would like to dispel the myth that revolutionary republicanism is or can be truly Christian by referring back to the most uncontroversial and widely accepted guidelines for behavior by all Christian groups and even by others of different religions (especially the Jews who everyone else pinched them from). I am referring, of course, to the Ten Commandments (not suggestions) and I do so not only because almost every Christian recognizes them but also because I have found them to be invaluable myself. When things get complicated, when arguments arise over what is “right” and what is “wrong” I always go back to the Ten Commandments; if you keep to them you should be in pretty good shape. No other rules were written by God’s own hand and they are also simply pretty good, common sense advice on how to have a good life and a good society.

The problem for revolutionary republicans and their leftist, socialist, egalitarian cohorts today is that they break every single one of them and that should demonstrate with absolute clarity how being a revolutionary republican is not only a poor fit with Christianity but is absolutely contradictory to it. Truly keep the Ten Commandments and you will have to be a traditional monarchist but be a revolutionary republican and you will be compelled to break every single one of them. There are some slight variations from group to group on how the Ten Commandments are numbered, how some are grouped together, but they all come out the same so feel free to disregard the numbers, I am using the list in my well worn prayer book and the Commandments are all there, so let’s have a look:

I. I am the Lord your God, you shall not have strange gods before me. Revolutionary republicans break this one every single day without even realizing it. They break it by putting the strangest of gods, themselves, before God in the very foundation of their society. Because they said, we will not have the monarch given to us by God, who exercises his/her office “by the grace of God” but rather we will do it ourselves, we will choose our own champion to have the highest place in the land, who will exercise his/her office by the grace of the mob and not by the grace of God. But, I can hear some of you right now saying, “But, but, Mr. Mad Monarchist, what about those popular monarchies where the monarch reigns by the popular will and not by the grace of God?” Sorry, the point still stands, because no matter what the law says, no matter how the succession is ordered, it is still God who decides who is born to whom and that includes the Royal Family so, in Belgium for example, it is still God who put King Philip on his throne and not the public pride. Monarchies can move away from this truth, and some have, but the root of it is still there and always will be until traitors succeed in abolishing the monarchy and cutting themselves off from it.

II. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain. Republicans do this all the time as well and never realize they are even breaking a commandment and in this case it can be a little confusing because almost everyone I have come across (including religious people, clerics etc) seem to have no idea what this commandment really means. It has nothing to do with “bad” language! It has nothing to do with what is called swearing or cursing or cussing. It means do not use the name of God to say something authoritatively that God didn’t say, in other words, taking something that is empty, false or the product of vanity and claiming that it comes from God. Republicans do this all the time, in republics and monarchies alike, by trying to re-write the Word of God, to change it to their own liking just as they changed the form of government itself to one of their own liking. One way they do it is what this article is all about, claiming that God wants people to be republicans when, in fact, He clearly and repeatedly commanded the very opposite of that. Proverbs 24:21 “My son, fear thou the LORD and the king: and meddle not with them that are given to change:” (or perhaps I should add for American readers, ‘them that are given to hope and change’, they’re bad news).

III. Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day. That one seems pretty simple and harmless but the revolutionaries break that one too because of what is at the root of it. You have six days to work and one God-given day to rest, so you are working for God, you are toiling at the duties He gave you in your station in life and in the dominion of the earth He placed under your care. It means everything belongs to God but, revolutionaries believe that everything belongs to the collective or to the representative of the collective (i.e. the mob) the State, everything is by, of and for “we the people”. This rule is all about God being in charge, God giving you a day off whereas revolutionaries believe the elite manipulators of the mob are in charge and they will decide how long you have to work for them and what they will leave for you. It is a fact, clearly seen in any history book, that one of the first things every real revolutionary regime did, be it in France or Russia, after coming to power was to ban feast days or holy days, which is where the word holiday comes from. The French even tried to switch to a 10-day week so there would be no Sabbath at all and to get away from that number seven which God is so fond of.

IV. Honor your father and your mother. It is easy to see the revolutionaries breaking this one all the time and this is one of the most widely held moral principles in human history, from Portugal to Korea, from Ireland to Japan this basic value has been taught by every major religion and by every major philosopher on moral issues. As usual, the republicans started with the monarch because what is a king and queen, an emperor and empress but the father and mother of their people? It is why loyal Russians used to adoringly call the Czar, “the Little Father”. Simply being a republican means you are not honoring your national father and mother but, of course, they didn’t stop there. They go after our actual fathers and mothers as well. It is the revolutionaries who have done everything in their power to destroy the family, to discourage motherhood, to belittle and besmirch fathers and to usurp the place of parents. Ever read “The Communist Manifesto” by Karl Marx? It explicitly calls for the destruction of the traditional family unit and the revolutionary leftists have been doing very well in carrying this out which is one very big reason why so many First World countries are de-populating. I would say it is also why, even in these days when monarchs have little to no power at all, the republicans still make it a priority to change the rules of succession which were made based on the traditional, patriarchal (it’s not a bad word in my book) family unit.

V. You shall not kill. I can hear you now, “Whoa! Hold on there Mr. Mad Monarchist, everyone agrees with that! You can’t possibly claim that revolutionaries are in favor of murder?!” Yes, yes I can because they absolutely are. They have done it before, they are doing it now and they will go on doing it so long as they have their treasonous hands on the levers of power. You say republicans don’t believe in murder? Explain the regicide of King Charles I, of King Louis XVI, of Czar Nicholas II and their families. Why do so many still think that was all okay? And I don’t much care if some will say it was a pity today because they haven’t put back what was lost so that reveals that they don’t really mean it. And isn’t it odd how the revolutionaries of today, who so often claim to be pacifists, have so much innocent blood on their hands? Forget murder for a moment and just think of killing in war. Never before was war so devastating and so deadly as when the republican, revolutionary mindset came to power. Sure, they had better weapons than their predecessors but they also had the concept of making entire peoples legitimate targets and of saying, at the outset, that there can never be such a thing as a negotiated peace. The era of traditional monarchies knew plenty of violence but, again, it took revolutionary republicans coming to power to say at the outset to the other side that the only choice was total submission and throwing yourselves on my mercy or complete and utter annihilation. But murder, on the largest scale ever in human history, has been done by the revolutionary republicans, we all know their names and while it may upset some people to say so it was also the revolutionaries who gave us the world in which many, many millions of babies are legally murdered by their own mothers. Sure, it happens in monarchies too but it wasn’t the monarchists who made it legal, it was the revolutionaries and those with the revolutionary mindset. It was also they who, when monarchs said “No” to this barbaric practice, took away the right of monarchs to ever say “No” again. Revolutionaries, whether in France or in Russia with the “New Soviet Man” have always been about building ideological utopias and human life is meaningless in the pursuit of that goal.

VI. You shall not commit adultery. Before anyone starts, let me say up front that, yes, plenty of monarchs have committed adultery, just as many presidents have. We can all agree on that. What is undeniable as well is that it has been the revolutionaries who have tried to argue that committing adultery is not wrong. They are the ones who have tried to say that men and women are the same, marriage is either meaningless or means very little (and with “no fault” divorce on demand they’ve pretty much succeeded on that front) and that the traditional family is a thing of the past. That is one reason why they despise the prominence of a Royal Family and why they want to get rid of them or try to force them into some new definition of what a family is supposed to be. The revolutionaries were the ones who abolished “monsieur” and “madam”, it was they who said we are all “comrades” or “brother” and “sister”. It was they who encouraged husbands and wives to betray each other because the revolutionary regime was more important than mere wedding vows. They have encouraged a culture of licentiousness that has made adultery commonplace and it is they who are trying to redefine marriage to mean whatever they want it to mean at a particular time. Some monarchs have committed adultery, some monarchs were homosexuals but none ever tried to change the law to say that adultery was okay or to re-define marriage to be more convenient for their homosexual appetites. The revolutionaries have been doing that and, unfortunately, they have been very successful at it to the point that, in my opinion, they have basically won. If marriage is not the union of one man and one woman and if you can end a marriage at any time for any reason or no reason at all, what really is the significance of making the vows and saying “I do”?

VII. You shall not steal. Ever since the first incited mob stormed and looted their first palace the revolutionary republicans have loved breaking this Commandment. They still pay lip-service to it but it has really become a farce if one looks at the situation honestly. They say, “don’t steal” but stealing from a king or prince or aristocrat is okay and it is also okay for them, “them” being the revolutionary, republican regime, to steal from you but you can’t steal from each other. Unless, of course, the regime says it is okay. Revolutionaries have stolen entire countries and then brazenly call it “liberation”! Not only do the revolutionaries do this but their descendants and republican apologists constantly try to defend and justify it. The problem is, it only gets worse as time goes on because, if it is okay to steal from the King, no one else is safe either. This is why revolutionaries invariably end up going in the socialist, communist, Marxist direction because the only way they can justify their theft is to attack the notion of private property itself. From there, it is pretty simple to say that stealing is okay because no one can really own anything in the first place! Everything belongs to the mob, to the masses, to “we the people” and so it is not really stealing so much as it is just rearranging who has control of how much. “From each according to his ability to each according to his need” as Karl Marx said. Revolutionaries are thieves by their very nature; they take by force that which does not belong to them.

VIII. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. Are you joking? Breaking this commandment is practically a requirement of revolutionary republicanism. It is the only way they can justify their very existence! How many examples should I cite? There were the revolutionaries who called the last Czar of Russia “Bloody Nicholas” and accused the Czarina of every sort of perversion with Rasputin, there were those who accused Queen Marie Antoinette of molesting her children, there were those who accused Emperor Charles of Austria-Hungary of being a drunk and even the American Founding Fathers, who were about the least revolutionary of republicans, still had to claim that King George III was some sort of authoritarian tyrant in order to justify their own rebellion. The list goes on and on. Dishonesty is practically the coin of the realm with revolutionaries and there is a perfectly good reason for the stereotype that an honest politician is almost a contradiction in terms. Their entire system is set up in such a way that honesty invariably leads to defeat and only dishonesty brings reward and advancement. Again, because the revolutionaries believe in remaking society, of creating a “heaven” on earth, any means used to bring that about are justified and so they think nothing of being blatantly dishonest over and over again. Their biggest lie is also the oldest, the one that goes back to Satan himself, the lie that if you break the rules, forget your loyalty and embrace betrayal, you can be in charge, you can be just like the one at the very top. It wasn’t true then and it’s not true now.

IX. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife. It would be very, very easy to make a joke here about philandering presidents but I will restrain myself (see Commandment VI, the same applies here). The real question here is why anyone would think that a revolutionary wouldn’t see anything wrong with coveting his neighbor’s wife. After all, the very fact of being a revolutionary means that fidelity has been abandoned and if an oath of loyalty and allegiance means nothing, why should the oath of your neighbor and his wife mean anything? Being a home wrecker is not a big deal when, as we have established, you place no importance on the family unit or the idea that an oath before God means anything, whether that oath is to ‘forsake all others’ or to ‘bear true faith and allegiance’. Most of what I have to say on this topic has been said already concerning adultery but this is talking about, not just cheating on your wife, but cheating with your neighbor’s wife. So, let us presume that the “you” here is not married but you covet your neighbor’s wife and so try to tempt her into adultery. This is also common with the revolutionary mindset because there has never been a revolutionary regime that has not tried to expand itself by any means necessary. It was not enough that the French revolutionaries betrayed and murdered their own king but then they had to go invade almost every other country in Europe, planting those ridiculous “Liberty Trees” along the way, to encourage other people to betray their kings and legitimate governments as well. It is why the Soviet Union sponsored treasonous terrorist groups from Cuba to Africa to Southeast Asia.

X. You shall not covet your neighbor’s goods. This one should be the most obvious, especially in the world of today. Modern revolutionary, republican, leftists are all about socialism, all about communism, all about egalitarianism and it is all based on the sin of envy. You can hear it every day if you listen for it: Why does the Queen get to have so many palaces? Why does the King get to have a yacht? Sadly, there are royal and religious leaders who help foster this mindset (inadvertently we can only hope) which is all based on the old Marxist revolutionary strategy of class warfare. They see everything as class warfare and this is why I have said over and over again that, at its core, socialism will destroy a monarchy, sooner or later, if it is allowed to take hold and flourish. Revolutionaries have used envy and jealousy to get what they want for centuries. Make the people covet what the rich have and so bring about class warfare in order to gain power. Make the people covet what the royals have and so bring about the destruction of the monarchy in order to have a republic that the revolutionaries can dominate. The sad thing is that so many are so easily misled by this obvious trap. After all, chopping King Louis’ head off did not feed one hungry child in Paris, murdering the Czar and his family did not make bread appear in Moscow or St Petersburg and just because Versailles was stolen by the new elite did not mean that every peasant got a palace of their own. This alone should be proof enough of what the late Margaret Thatcher said about the socialists, that they would rather the poor be poorer so long as the rich were poorer too. Far from being a Commandment they respect, the revolutionaries have made breaking the Tenth Commandment their number one tactic, they use it in the social sphere, the economic and the political to push the egalitarian agenda that will mean power for themselves and poverty, oppression and misery for everyone else. Whether it is the wealth of the rich man, the lands of an aristocrat or the crown and palace of the monarch, coveting the goods of others has been the most well-used road to power for the revolutionaries since they first stumbled upon the idea. They are in favor of breaking it and proudly so.

That should, just about, cover it. Revolutionary republicans do not just break the Biblical commands to be loyal to their monarchs, they break every one of the most basic and fundamental rules Christians have (and other religions as well). Now, I should perhaps clarify that not all republicans are “revolutionary republicans” but the great, vast majority of them are. These are people who have or have had a monarch of their own that they should be loyal to but are not. It can be a little hard to come up with a name for them since they change the way they refer to themselves so frequently but I think anyone with a genuine desire to will be able to recognize who I am talking about here. They are a type of people who have been around for a long time, ruling in republics and ruining monarchies from within and probably never before has their influence been greater or more widespread. The primary point though that I want everyone to come away with is that they are not Christian, they never have been and they never will be because they are to the core opposed to the very fundamentals of Christian morality. They are not just wrong, they are evil and we should not hesitate to say so.

Of course they "can" be but that doesn't mean they should. If one is going by what the Bible says on the subject, God told King David that if his successors were immoral then God Himself would punish them but their right to rule would never be taken away. In the New Testament, the command to "render unto Caesar" was given by Jesus during the end of the reign of the Emperor Tiberius when, by most accounts, he was behaving quite immorally indeed. But perhaps a better example would be the prophet Daniel. When the King enacted a law that ran contrary to the law of God, Daniel did not turn against the King or try to depose him but refused to obey the law (because God's law comes first) and accepted the consequences. So, basically, in the Bible, if a monarch did wrong it was God who punished him. David's life story is illustrative. King Saul was doing wrong, in fact, he was trying to kill David but David would not retaliate in kind because, as he said, he could not raise his hand against the Lord's anointed.

My rule on the subject would be that loyalty to the institution of monarchy- the Crown- supersedes loyalty to any particular individual, including the individual monarch. As such, if the actions of a particular monarch threaten the continuity of the entire dynasty, then monarchists are both permitted and duty bound to remove said monarch from power and install the claimant with the next most legitimate claim to the throne in their place, or, if possible, establish a regency. This is only permissible in the case that the action is taken to preserve the monarchy and the dynasty, however.

On that matter, MM, your recent post about Vietnamese Emperor Thiệu Trị aroused my interest and motivated me to read more about Vietnamese history and the Nguyễn dynasty in the 19th century in particular. I'd suggest that any monarchist should look into the Roman Catholic mandarin Nguyễn Trường Tộ, whose views on the traditional Confucian monarchy of Vietnam, monarchical legitimacy, and the role of the divine right of kings in Christianity- as well as modernisation within the context of the traditional monarchical structure- were very interesting. If I might make a humble request, MM, if you haven't covered Tộ already in a Monarchist Profile, it'd be fantastic if you could do so at some point in the future.

I believe I've mentioned him in a past post but haven't done a profile yet, though as I recall I did do one on Nguyen Huu Bai who was a Catholic mandarin in the court of Emperor Khai Dinh and the early years of the Bao Dai era. I would like to do one anyway and the next monarch profile from that direction will be Emperor Tu Duc.

I find your blog fascinating. I used to identify as a "conservative republican" because I thought that it was the party that represented, "faith, family, and freedom" but, then my eyes opened up when I realized that it represented none of these things. Thank you for your blog and the history that it has taught me.

Excellent post! Modernism surely has an hidden root to it as proven by the commandment-breaking of its partidsans the Sunday of Orthodoxy it only those who themselve rebel against their lawful Monarchs who are anathema. Lenin, therefore, anathematized himself according to the Russian Orthodox Church but Dmitri Medvedev did not. The Hebrews did align themselves with the republican Romans against the Hellenistic Monarchs as evidenced in Maccabees. A revolutionary republican is surely doing ill: someone born into and living under a prexisting republican government is free from guilt because personal sins do not pass from one generation to another. I believe that apostate tyrants were actually identified as having power "not from God": St. Basil the great prayed for, and it was granted, the defeat of the tyrant Julian the Apostate. He did not physically resist him, however: God ended his ravings through a warrior Saint. This confirms your notion of wicked monarchs being God's business, but a distinction must always be drawn between revolution an disobeying rulers who order deeds done against the Gospel or apostasy. A though-provoking post for denizens of a republic!

"..someone born into and living under a prexisting republican government is free from guilt because personal sins do not pass from one generation to another."

What does one make of original sin, then? Though we might not be held personally responsible for the sins of our fathers, we are most assuredly corrupted by them. That is how sin reigns over the unredeemed race: Through the contamination of sin that flows from father to son.

The first revolt in history against a monarch was Satan's uprising in Heaven. Saul Alinsky rightly credited the devil as being the first radical, and Samuel Johnson famously quipped that "the first Whig was the Devil".

As the Ten Commandments form the very basis of Jewish law, it follows that truly devout followers of Judaism ought devote themselves to the monarchies of their native land, both in Israel (the House of David in particular) and among the Diaspora. Pogroms aside, how is this to be reconciled with the persecutions they have faced by various monarchical administrations throughout the centuries?

I don't see what needs reconciled. They endured, which is all they could have done, which is what they did in the Old Testament until God saw fit to deliver them. Today they have their own state to go to and Jewish monarchists there are arguing for the restoration of the Davidic monarchy and the traditional kingdom as it was in the past.

(Keeping in mind, of course, the greatest period of antisemitism was lead by the republican government of the Third Reich, as opposed to the tolerance promoted by many other administrations, including the "enlightened despots" of Europe.)

The Freemasonry created Nazism, Liberalism, Socialism, etc. and brought the world society into violence, terror and chaos. In addition to what Laetitio said, the Antisemitism after the French Revolution is more wide-speard than ever. As Israeli, masorati Jew (Mizrahi and Ashkenazi), I can see how the Supreme Court and Local newtork (Freemasons) trying to destroy our Religious Idetification and Jewish culture, hope that one day we may see the Restoration of the true Monarchy of Israel and Judah. Amen. May God bless you all and restore the old, rightous monarchies of Europe and beyond.

Also, I hope that your blog will gain much further support, anyway you have mine :)

I think you should make a category of all the passages in Scripture that are explicitly commanding Christians to be monarchists just so new readers could see them easily and older ones could refresh their memory, but most importantly to see the excuses the republicans will make in the comment section.